Nuclear power will 'worsen drought' (OZ)

[jpak]

http://www.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/story/0,,20664657-5001028,00.html

AUSTRALIA'S crippling drought will worsen if the Howard government succeeds in its push for nuclear power, Queensland Premier Peter Beattie has told a conference.

Addressing the New Zealand Labour Party conference in Rotorua today, Mr Beattie said an independent study commissioned by the Queensland government showed a nuclear power station would use 25 per cent more water than a coal-fired power station.

"At a time when our farming communities are hurting badly, it is a folly for (Prime Minister John) Howard to be entertaining the thought of nuclear power stations in Queensland or anywhere else," he said.

"Many towns and shires in our state are struggling to get enough drinking water, let alone enough to satisfy the amount a nuclear station would need to guzzle."

<more>

[MercutioATC]

1. I'm decidedly NOT a nuclear power proponent, but this argument seems kinda silly.

They should be taking the "What the hell do we do with the waste?" tack, IMO.

[Richard D]

2. Nukular waste is totally safe!

Why, after a billion or two years, most of it'll have decayed away.

[MercutioATC]

3. Jesus will have called us home by then, anyway.

You're right. We have nothing to worry about. :crazy:

(unrelated question: what sort of photography do you do?)

[Richard D]

4. Well . . .

. . . my fav is travel stuff, cause it's closely related to traveling which I like more than anything else that's legal and/or vertical. Also basic nature stuff. I'm not a pro but wouldn't mind making that transition someday. I'd be a happy camper traveling most of the year. Haven't done enough of it yet.

[greenparty]

6. water

is another global warming premium.Dont think its an anti nuke thing,i think its a real concern.OZ is a pretty dry place and wouldnt be surprised if water was a guarded commodity.
Lake Powell here in the u.s. has been drying up for a long time,lakes in russia and the ME have disappeared but when you lose the moisture and runoff from seasonal snowmelts due to GW,you lose a very large portion of lake feedstock water and in return,fresh water becomes scarce.Scarce for cities that arent having their local reservoirs replenished.
T Boone Pickens,the oil cat who has made zillions is buying up water rights all over the u.s. because he sees that as becoming more valuable than oil ever was.

[jpak]

11. Unlike fossil thermal and nuclear power plants...

PV, wind turbines, solar thermal and electric systems don't use water - much better choices for drought stricken areas of the planet...

[Dogmudgeon]

16. Hold on just a second there ...

... these things have to be manufactured. Manufacturing uses quite a bit of water, whether for manufacturing wind plants or nuclear control rods. And also, whether we're manufacturing 1000 nuclear reactors or 2 million wind plants, it's going build up a big industrial thirst.

Most of the drought-stricken parts of the world are also extremely poor. Building the power plants of any kind and bringing them into a drought-stricken area is expensive. In most cases, these areas don't even get food, which is (still) a lot cheaper than energy -- and human life, it would seem, is cheaper yet. The current problem isn't directly energy OR water, it's politics.

Water resources are their own problem, yet another problem we have to face quickly. Trying to stick the onus on nuclear energy doesn't make sense from any point of view -- and I think Mr. Beattie is likewise looking at the issue through anti-nuclear blinders.

Water, biofuels, nuclear energy, solar PV, population, food production, climate change ... that's just the start of the list, and it doesn't include the 800-pound gorilla of all problems, politics. There are a lot of problems, and while they are interconnected, those interconnections each have different dynamics. If we think that by taking nuclear energy out of consideration we've eliminated any of our other problems, we're fooling ourselves. And that's the case no matter what one's stand is on nuclear energy.

--p!

[Dead_Parrot]

5. No, it makes sense...

They won't switch to nuclear power, because the coal lobby is almost as strong in Oz as it is in the US. But if they said "nuclear is evil and will kill us all", someone might turn around and ask why they are happy exporting over 10,000 tonnes of uranium oxide every year.

The only way out is to say "Nuclear is fine, but it's not right for us", and back it up with some half-arsed excuse. Cue Peter Beattie...

[hunter]

7. It's really going to suck in Australia when the oceans dry up.

On the rest of the planet too, for what that's worth...

:silly:

[NNadir]

12. The second law of thermodynamics only applies to nuclear plants.

Coal and gas plants are cooled by special fairies from outer space. It's magic. The fairies blow and that's it, the outfall water from the Australian coal plants is perfectly cool, like an Antarctic iceberg. If your especially smart, you put a windmill in front of the faries pursed lips and you will receive an extra brazillion watts and an extra brazillion Arnold Schwartenegger^TM Brand solar roofs.

Coal and gas thermal plants don't use cooling water. They are not bad for the environment. Nuclear powers are bad for the environment because "nuclear" is spelled with an "N." Also you can spell "nuclear" in funny and amusing ways that demonstrate deep insight into the laws of science. For instance if you say "Nooklar" you have demonstrated that 27 billion tons of carbon dioxide is not "waste." Anyhow, how many people actually spell "gas" "Gaz?" Just the Russians and they don't feel pain the way we do, nor do they seem to know the right alphabet, using some kind of Greek looking thing. The Russians are trying to control all of our gas just because it's under their land.

Australia will go nuclear. Everyone will, in fact if you read the news, everyone is. Because it's the only workable solution.

[XemaSab]

8. Stupid question here:

So in a coal fired power plant, the water is used to make steam.

In a nuclear plant the water is used to make steam AND for cooling, but can't the cooling water be reused? :shrug: Or does it evaporate? :shrug:

[One_Life_To_Give]

9. Both plants need cooling.

Both Fossil and Nuclear plants require refrigeration on the downstream side of the turbine. The only advantage I see with regard to cooling a Fossil plant is the amount of heat sent up the smoke stack.
Now if they used a closed cooling system they would eliminate almost all of their water needs. Although it would cost more.

[hunter]

10. It's all about the evaporative cooling water.

In both coal and nuclear plants the expensive treated water running through the power turbines is a small fraction of the overall water use.

For the same expenses in the cooling loop, a coal plant might use less water, but there's little meaning in that. Coal or nuclear, you design the plant to make use of whatever water resource you've got. Access to cheap fresh water will improve the overall energy efficiency of the plant, but it's not a deal breaker. There will be problems when plants designed for abundant freshwater supplies run short of water, for example during the European heat waves, but it's not impossible to upgrade these plants to use less water.

For power plants that use ocean water for cooling, desalinization of ocean water to run through the turbines is a very mature technology.

[Throckmorton]

13. Gee, my nuke uses seawater as an ultimate heat sink.

Australia must have a shortage of oceanfront property.

[Nihil]

14. There again, maybe they are *to* close to the shoreline ...

I suspect that the future nuclear power stations are placed well inland to avoid
the coming rise in sealevel ... and so falling foul of the shortage of fresh water
for cooling ...

The smart thing to do would be to build them on cliffs above the sea: use the salt-water
for cooling and the pumping bill will gradually get less & less as the sea-levels rise ...

[Throckmorton]

15. We currently use RO to for makeup

We use Reverse Osmosis, then post treat with Cation/Anion Resin Beds.

We use about 125,000 GPD for makeup, for a plant with a net generation of almost 1800 MW per day. All of this makeup comes from seawater, at about .08 cents per gallon.